Fake Picasso? This came up recently at an auction.

it is based on one of the etchings from the Suite Vollard one of Picasso's most famous works. However, the image is reversed from the real work. Although the pencil signature is going the correct way, the etched date as well as the rest of the image is reversed. Also there is a blind stamp or watermark or something shown in the last picture. But that doesnt match the correct water marks. In this case, the sheet is of the larger, deluxe edition, like 20" tall. Those papers had either Montvale/Mongtgolfier or Galatea (the paper maker) water marks (if they had any mark, only half the sheets had watermarks). And this one seems like a harp vaguely similar to the Galatea mark.

 

If I came across this in an auction my train of (admittedly very amateurish) thought would be

1) It can’t be from the original ‘deluxe’ version because the image is reversed. Add to that it’s on the wrong kind of paper with a wrong blind-stamp.

2) To get a reverse image someone must have redone a printing plate with an exact copy of the artwork. Could this have been done with Picasso’s involvement? Unlikely but reference ‘Pour Roby’ so definitely worth researching.

3) What other explanation for the re-worked plate? Surely not fraudulent because it would be silly to get it the wrong way round. Maybe then a printmaker trying their hand and purposely doing it the wrong way round to keep it out of the ‘it might just be genuine’ market.

4) In which case the signature possibly added later by someone else.

Verdict : Unless I could find evidence of a ‘Pour Roby’ possible provenance I’d personally not bid but probably totally wrong. (again stress amateur view).

So how much did it sell for?????

 

$1188. Wow.

https://www.bidsquare.com/online-au...ned-picasso-etching-on-handmade-paper-2279324

 

Yeah the plate thing that you mention is probably what happened. There are known fakes [of this particular Picasso set] that have been produced by people reversing the process and producing plates from the originals. Not sure if that would produce a reverse image or what. So that maybe what's going on here.

Also that embossing, or blind stamp whatever it is, if you could figure out what that means. Perhaps it might be a personal collector stamp to indicate it belongs in his collection. It does not appear to be an authentic water mark in any case.

EDIT: see part in brackets.